Werewolf XXXIII: Animal Farm (SEE POST #4 FOR ALL UPDATES)

[saldana]

Originally Posted by RealDeal

Rough game. What made it tough is that we didn't really gain significantly more info as this game progressed. The villagers were in the dark on Day 8 almost as much as Day 1.

no offense to anyone that has hosted lately, as all the games have been extremely well done and very entertaining to play or watch, but has anyone else gotten the feeling recently that these games are becoming too complex for their own good?

it seems to me that the past few games are trying to reinvent the wheel with some of the mechanics and roles that have been in play. i have also gotten the feeling that they have been slanted towards the wolves more than in the past as well. I know that when i designed my games, it was hard to resist the urge to make a really cool bad guy role...its easy and fun...but unless we are putting in checks and balances for the villagers to combat the ubervillans, it is tilting the table against them

just my thoughts

great job path....wish i had lived more than 5 minutes

[Abe Sargent]

One interesting sideline. Night one, the bodyguard protected the seer and the seer scanned the bodyguard. I don't know how often that happens, but it has to be really rare.

[RealDeal]

I've said this before, but I feel like villagers in the WW games make the same mistake over and over again by waiting too long to reveal. Without any info, villagers are just flying blind for the first 3-4 days, while the wolves have a huge advantage. Moreover, you get lots of accidental kills of important villager roles. AND then you end up on days 5-7 making decisions based on posts and votes on the first 3-4 days when most of the posts and voters didn't know what the heck they were doing.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Thom, I didn't have an option to do it without Grey here without risking the tie-breaker being a wolf. And Alan was lurking as a guest with his crappy vote switch late anyways.

Alan, for that "guest lurk" stunt you have earned yourself a day one vote and a bloody death in the next game I run

I actually wasn't lurking. I forced myself to stay away till 8:59. Before I left for the evening, I told Pass that I would come back 1 min before to change the vote just in case. He actually jabbed at me on Instant messenger saying way to be late on that.

Whatever its worth, I really did have an ice cream social for my daughter tonight

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by saldana

no offense to anyone that has hosted lately, as all the games have been extremely well done and very entertaining to play or watch, but has anyone else gotten the feeling recently that these games are becoming too complex for their own good?

it seems to me that the past few games are trying to reinvent the wheel with some of the mechanics and roles that have been in play. i have also gotten the feeling that they have been slanted towards the wolves more than in the past as well. I know that when i designed my games, it was hard to resist the urge to make a really cool bad guy role...its easy and fun...but unless we are putting in checks and balances for the villagers to combat the ubervillans, it is tilting the table against them

just my thoughts

great job path....wish i had lived more than 5 minutes

For my next game, which is in four or five games, I'm building around the town of Bree in Middle Earth, and it will be simpler that my first with just one twist. So I recognize what you are saying.


-Anxiety

[hoopsguy]

I think the game was fine as long as Path gives us some information in the death descriptions to work with in the event that we lose key roles early. That was an assumption I made and it did not prove to be a good one here. We were in a pretty tough spot with the seer and the lynch viewer gone by the end of Night 3.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by saldana

no offense to anyone that has hosted lately, as all the games have been extremely well done and very entertaining to play or watch, but has anyone else gotten the feeling recently that these games are becoming too complex for their own good?

it seems to me that the past few games are trying to reinvent the wheel with some of the mechanics and roles that have been in play. i have also gotten the feeling that they have been slanted towards the wolves more than in the past as well. I know that when i designed my games, it was hard to resist the urge to make a really cool bad guy role...its easy and fun...but unless we are putting in checks and balances for the villagers to combat the ubervillans, it is tilting the table against them

just my thoughts

great job path....wish i had lived more than 5 minutes

I actually think the last game we played with the mutants/good guys and chaos was very difficult for the wolves to win that one.

[Thomkal]

I actually had some outside information that would have changed the game had Fouts lived. Path PM'ed me when all that happened with what animal we were. He did not send me the original PM either, like with Fouts. But he told me I was a horse. I knew that already from what Conflag had posted. But I felt that was outside information and against the spirit of the game, so didn't feel I should reveal. Plus I couldn't get those connected votes of his and DC out of my mind.

I also tried to hint in one of my last posts about something else that I could not talk about...I had the tiebreaker. I tried to hint at by saying if there was one rev left they could get the advantage with my death. We weren't allowed to reveal it, so didn't want to go against the spirit of the rules any more than that.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I think the game was fine as long as Path gives us some information in the death descriptions to work with in the event that we lose key roles early. That was an assumption I made and it did not prove to be a good one here. We were in a pretty tough spot with the seer and the lynch viewer gone by the end of Night 3.

I actually think if people had gone with the plan that Swaggs came out with, to help build a circle of trust, you would have been better off. If Bek and Grey had done it, you would have had 4 cleared villagers earlier on and alot more information.

[RealDeal]

Originally Posted by saldana

no offense to anyone that has hosted lately, as all the games have been extremely well done and very entertaining to play or watch, but has anyone else gotten the feeling recently that these games are becoming too complex for their own good?

it seems to me that the past few games are trying to reinvent the wheel with some of the mechanics and roles that have been in play. i have also gotten the feeling that they have been slanted towards the wolves more than in the past as well. I know that when i designed my games, it was hard to resist the urge to make a really cool bad guy role...its easy and fun...but unless we are putting in checks and balances for the villagers to combat the ubervillans, it is tilting the table against them

just my thoughts

great job path....wish i had lived more than 5 minutes

I agree Saldana. I thought Path did a great job, but I didn't really find it fun this game. I thought it was kind of a crappy rule set. You have to have some ability to make some rational choices. In this game, we didn't. I was getting really frustrated by the time I was lynched, and was getting particularly frustrated with people who claimed with so much self-assurance to have answers when there was no possible way they could.
This was probably the first time I've ever been wrongly lynched and didn't mind too much.

Even in the endgame when I was just watching, I had no fucking clue who was good or bad. I would have voted for Thomkal, too.

[RealDeal]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I actually had some outside information that would have changed the game had Fouts lived. Path PM'ed me when all that happened with what animal we were. He did not send me the original PM either, like with Fouts. But he told me I was a horse. I knew that already from what Conflag had posted. But I felt that was outside information and against the spirit of the game, so didn't feel I should reveal. Plus I couldn't get those connected votes of his and DC out of my mind.

I also tried to hint in one of my last posts about something else that I could not talk about...I had the tiebreaker. I tried to hint at by saying if there was one rev left they could get the advantage with my death. We weren't allowed to reveal it, so didn't want to go against the spirit of the rules any more than that.

I also don't understand why it was not allowed to say you had the tiebreak. I didn't see the reason for that at all. I think it could have made the game more fun as it could have allowed for potential gamesmanship.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I actually had some outside information that would have changed the game had Fouts lived. Path PM'ed me when all that happened with what animal we were. He did not send me the original PM either, like with Fouts. But he told me I was a horse. I knew that already from what Conflag had posted. But I felt that was outside information and against the spirit of the game, so didn't feel I should reveal. Plus I couldn't get those connected votes of his and DC out of my mind.

Yeah, DC and I both suspected Path, and for good reasons. You decided to off DC instead. I guess it was easier for you to assume two wolves would vote in the same block, back to back.

[Alan T]

One question I had was the last day swaggs was around, he and hoops were playing back and forth on something they kept hinting to each other about "The big assumption" .. I sat for at least 30 minutes trying to figure out what that was.

I assumed hoops and swaggs both knew we attacked swaggs that night and hoops just said he was attacked trying to draw out someone in a trap.. Then when Pass (still as a villager since the sympathizer hadn't kicked in yet) kept questioning "Are you sure it was you attacked??" I wanted to slap myself..

What was the big secret there? I never did figure it out

[Thomkal]

I feel like I owe Dodgerchick an apology. Even I her main accuser was beginning to think she was just an innocent good by the time we lynched her. But I never could be sure, and it was probably better off for good if she was out of the game at that point rather than have all that hang around for another day. So sorry Dodgerchick.

[RealDeal]

I thought DC was a wolf too. Between all the throwaway votes and her posting of all the stuff from wiki and the book (the typical "helpy but not helpful" action), she seemed to have the perfect wolf profile. I think I tried to start a bandwagon on her three straight days.

[Abe Sargent]

THis is to hoopsguy who was questioning the "ass" comment a lot:

Sometimes an ass is just as ass.


BTW, I had scanned Chubby on Night 3 and Alan T was next on my list as I created my "need to scan" list. I would have found a Rev on Night four. And I would have gotten in the middle on day three and told hoops and Chubby to knock it off and look elsewhere.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I actually had some outside information that would have changed the game had Fouts lived. Path PM'ed me when all that happened with what animal we were. He did not send me the original PM either, like with Fouts. But he told me I was a horse. I knew that already from what Conflag had posted. But I felt that was outside information and against the spirit of the game, so didn't feel I should reveal. Plus I couldn't get those connected votes of his and DC out of my mind.

Thanks for having my back. I should have asked you about your PM. I thought saying I was a Barnyard Animal was enough for the good guys. I guess not.

[hoopsguy]

Alan, here is the PM I received. Let me know if I should have taken from this that Swaggs was the target:

You watch over Swaggs yet again. The night is quiet, and you are frustrated to think that you might be missing out on an attack........until you are hit from behind. Stunned, you whirl and after a frantic struggle your attacker runs off.......but not before you realize that the attacker is GoldenEagle.

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

I feel like I owe Dodgerchick an apology. Even I her main accuser was beginning to think she was just an innocent good by the time we lynched her. But I never could be sure, and it was probably better off for good if she was out of the game at that point rather than have all that hang around for another day. So sorry Dodgerchick.

It's cool, I don't blame you for thinking I was evil. Hell, I thought YOU were evil when I saw you hanging around at the last minute... moreso after you asked Grey to change his vote.

That's WW for ya

[Lorena]

So umm... Passacaglia, why was lurker in the thread?

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I actually think if people had gone with the plan that Swaggs came out with, to help build a circle of trust, you would have been better off. If Bek and Grey had done it, you would have had 4 cleared villagers earlier on and alot more information.

Yeah I didn't quite understand why the seers didn't go for that either. I would have waited another day to get more information, but that always seemed like a solid plan to me. What I want to know is why didn't Bek do a full reveal when he was up for lynch instead of hinting around it?

[Lorena]

I sucked ass... big time. Finding a wolf was like finding a needle in a haystack and I played horribly.

[Fouts]

BTW, I thought Swaggs played a great game. Hats off. Alan, good job but you had the advantage.

Thanks to the hosts for their time.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Alan, here is the PM I received. Let me know if I should have taken from this that Swaggs was the target:

You watch over Swaggs yet again. The night is quiet, and you are frustrated to think that you might be missing out on an attack........until you are hit from behind. Stunned, you whirl and after a frantic struggle your attacker runs off.......but not before you realize that the attacker is GoldenEagle.

Yeah, I can see why you thought that then.. So there was no secret code about the "big assumption" I was paranoid you were on to me trying to get pm rights from greyroofoo for a while

[Abe Sargent]

NP, but all I did was pinch hit for an inning.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I actually wasn't lurking. I forced myself to stay away till 8:59. Before I left for the evening, I told Pass that I would come back 1 min before to change the vote just in case. He actually jabbed at me on Instant messenger saying way to be late on that.

Whatever its worth, I really did have an ice cream social for my daughter tonight

I actually wasn't worried -- I had to leave myself with an hour to go before lynch, but it didn't seem like anyone was seriously contemplating a vote switch. Of course, there's always the fear it might have happened randomly anyway, but I thought it was unlikely.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Fouts

BTW, I thought Swaggs played a great game. Hats off. Alan, good job but you had the advantage.

Thanks to the hosts for their time.

Yeah I can see that. I don't think this was my best game ever. I do think Hoops did a much better job than he gave himself credit for.. By the end we had to play defensively constantly thinking what he was going to do rather than setting the pace ourselves.

[hoopsguy]

Alan, if I knew the attack was on Swaggs you would have had my vote instantly. The fact that the attack was on me led me to believe they were conceding the PMs to Swaggs, which helped your cause in my evaluations.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Dodgerchick

So umm... Passacaglia, why was lurker in the thread?

I asked her about it, and she said she wasn't in the thread. Not that it mattered -- I didn't tell her my role until lynch tonight. Believe me, when we talk, it is NOT about FOFC! (actually, we talk about it pretty often)

Anyway, I bet you and Antmeister are sitting there, crying about your loss! (Sorry, it had to be said)

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Alan, if I knew the attack was on Swaggs you would have had my vote instantly. The fact that the attack was on me led me to believe they were conceding the PMs to Swaggs, which helped your cause in my evaluations.

GE and i debated for a while on whether or not to try that move. We thought that it was likely that you lied about what nights you had guarded swaggs but we felt that GE was likely to be lynched the next day unless something big happened.. so we needed something big and took a chance there.. it failed for us.. That night almost cost us the game.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Fouts

Thanks for having my back. I should have asked you about your PM. I thought saying I was a Barnyard Animal was enough for the good guys. I guess not.

Actually saying you were a barnyard animal meant nothing. The rules list barnyard animals as being part of the good team, aka villagers. So saying that was just like saying you were a villager in any game that had them. I should have tried to do something with that info though. Sorry abvout that.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Alan T

One question I had was the last day swaggs was around, he and hoops were playing back and forth on something they kept hinting to each other about "The big assumption" .. I sat for at least 30 minutes trying to figure out what that was.

I assumed hoops and swaggs both knew we attacked swaggs that night and hoops just said he was attacked trying to draw out someone in a trap.. Then when Pass (still as a villager since the sympathizer hadn't kicked in yet) kept questioning "Are you sure it was you attacked??" I wanted to slap myself..

What was the big secret there? I never did figure it out

Yeah, once I knew what the score was in the game, I wished I hadn't done that. But I lucked out in my recent vote -- voting for GE first, then having the three trusteds follow me.

[hoopsguy]

I had seen lurker in the thread as well.

The meta-game line is really challenging to draw. I used it when I suggested a vote from Blade on Day 3. But I ignored it with the lurker stuff and I ignored it in regards to a PM I got from the moderator at one point.

Which is kind of a bummer looking back at the game right now, as it was so very winnable. But I didn't like the outcome in the thread after the Bek vote and I think that shaped some of my behavior afterwards.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Actually saying you were a barnyard animal meant nothing. The rules list barnyard animals as being part of the good team, aka villagers. So saying that was just like saying you were a villager in any game that had them. I should have tried to do something with that info though. Sorry abvout that.

Barnyard animal was in my PM, just like a couple of others that posted (Bek and Blade). Bad guys or role players most likely didn't get it in their PM (and apparently you, who entered late).

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I had seen lurker in the thread as well.

The meta-game line is really challenging to draw. I used it when I suggested a vote from Blade on Day 3. But I ignored it with the lurker stuff and I ignored it in regards to a PM I got from the moderator at one point.

Which is kind of a bummer looking back at the game right now, as it was so very winnable. But I didn't like the outcome in the thread after the Bek vote and I think that shaped some of my behavior afterwards.

What else do we have as villagers? If they want to lock us up with the lights off and no information while our friends die one by one, I'm looking for anything I can use.

[hoopsguy]

I'll uphold the edit rule - meant a vote on Bek on Day 3.

[Thomkal]

I must say that I don't think I would play in a game again with no lynch/death role reveals, unless there was a way to get them at some point in the game. It was just too frustrating not being able to rely on that information. It was an interesting challenge though.

I would certainly mod a game with no reveals though just to see the players go crazy!

[Alan T]

[Shameless self-promotion]

My WW game is all planned out and ready to go, and will have full role reveals on death Hopefully will be alot of fun after Mckerney's game is done

[/Shameless self-promotion]

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Fouts

Barnyard animal was in my PM, just like a couple of others that posted (Bek and Blade). Bad guys or role players most likely didn't get it in their PM (and apparently you, who entered late).

Ah I see what you are saying here. I did get it in my PM. Just didn't get what kind of barnyard animal I was until later (though conflag had already posted he was a horse).

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

I had seen lurker in the thread as well.

The meta-game line is really challenging to draw. I used it when I suggested a vote from Blade on Day 3. But I ignored it with the lurker stuff and I ignored it in regards to a PM I got from the moderator at one point.

Which is kind of a bummer looking back at the game right now, as it was so very winnable. But I didn't like the outcome in the thread after the Bek vote and I think that shaped some of my behavior afterwards.

Yeah, I asked her again just now, and she said she had been in the thread, because she wanted to see if we were talking about the book. But that was earlier on, when I first told here there was a WW game based on the book, not the day DC mentioned it. I think by the time I became a rev, she was too busy at work to check out the thread. But since she was busy at work, her memory might have been a bit screwy, and she might have checked out the thread that day after all, then forgot or something.

[Passacaglia]

In retrospect, I felt pretty stupid revealing myself to be a pig. That probably made me more likely to be Minimus.

[st.cronin]

How about me having the tiebreaker day 1, picking Swaggs, and him then Duking me. I bet path had a good laugh over that.

[hoopsguy]

One good thing came out of this game - "The Schmidty Defense"

[Lorena]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I asked her about it, and she said she wasn't in the thread. Not that it mattered -- I didn't tell her my role until lynch tonight. Believe me, when we talk, it is NOT about FOFC! (actually, we talk about it pretty often)

Anyway, I bet you and Antmeister are sitting there, crying about your loss! (Sorry, it had to be said)

Interesting, I had a screenshot to prove otherwise. As far as Antmeister's concerned, nah, he didn't care. I told him quite a bit about my escapades here and he thought I sucked, so I challenged him so we'll see where this goes.

[GoldenEagle]

Do I count as a win on my WW record?

Alan T was great to work with. As he mentioned, we had to gamble on the night we attacked Swaggs. The idea was to frame Grey. It is odd that hoopsguy did not get the message saying that Swaggs was attacked. Is that who you protected that night?

What I do not understand is how Alan T gained so much trust.

[Grammaticus]

I guess I get to count this one as a win too, WHOOT! Not that I did anything to assist, but a win is a win. Funny thing is, I scanned both GE and Pass as the evil seer.

I also asked Path about the rules changes and notes written on dead animals, after I died. He told me it meant nothing and was pure flavor. Then it was kind of funny to watch a few of you put so much into trying to glean meaning out of it.

[Grammaticus]

dola,

I scanned:

Night 1 - Hoops
Night 2 - Greyroofoo
Night 3 - Golden Eagle
Night 4 - Pass

Looks like I was hitting roled players every time, just not the correct one.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by saldana

no offense to anyone that has hosted lately, as all the games have been extremely well done and very entertaining to play or watch, but has anyone else gotten the feeling recently that these games are becoming too complex for their own good?

it seems to me that the past few games are trying to reinvent the wheel with some of the mechanics and roles that have been in play. i have also gotten the feeling that they have been slanted towards the wolves more than in the past as well. I know that when i designed my games, it was hard to resist the urge to make a really cool bad guy role...its easy and fun...but unless we are putting in checks and balances for the villagers to combat the ubervillans, it is tilting the table against them

just my thoughts

great job path....wish i had lived more than 5 minutes

I have to agree with a good bit of this. I have been looking for the more simple games to play. The complex ones just don't have the same apeal to me. But other seem to like them a good bit.

[Thomkal]

What I'd like to know is: What the hell were you thinking Chubby? I just don't understand your play at all now that roles have been revealed. It lead to you being lynched and provided a safe spot for a rev to hide and to use against the rest of us good guys that voted for you.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

Do I count as a win on my WW record?

Alan T was great to work with. As he mentioned, we had to gamble on the night we attacked Swaggs. The idea was to frame Grey. It is odd that hoopsguy did not get the message saying that Swaggs was attacked. Is that who you protected that night?

What I do not understand is how Alan T gained so much trust.

I think it was more the fact that there were stronger candidates for lynch-Chubby, DC, GE than him for a long while. At one point I almost asked in the thread if this was typical play from Alan (whom I've never played with before) because he was acting so passively I thought.

In looking over my notes I have to laugh at the Day 1 vote by Alan on Hoops because they almost always have been on opposite sides. That should have been our cue to lynch Alan right there!

So what was the reasoning for picking Lathum as your night kill? That was just wild that you got him on the night he likely would have acted.